Help desk
< November 22	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 24 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

November 23

Access archives archived by Miszabot

How can I, or is there any easy way, to access and search through the archives that Miszabot and others have moved old sections of talk pages to? Eflatmajor7th (talk) 07:10, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The archives usually appear in the upper right corner of the screen that has archives on them. If you have the specific page that you are looking people might be able to help more. XFEM Skier (talk) 07:50, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Talk:Doctor Who page has an archive with a search box set up for the archive. You should be able to set up a similar archive search box on the talk pages to which you are referring as an easy way, to access and search through the archives. The search box seems to operate the same as adding the search string "October prefix:Talk:Doctor Who/" in the general search box on the upper right of your screen. -- Jreferee (talk) 08:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, it was right in front of my face and I just didn't see it... Eflatmajor7th (talk) 21:22, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

biographical entry

My biographical entry is incomplete. What is the procedure to improve it. Is it ethical for me to send the informaton, or sould it be from an independent source? To whom would it be sent?

John Weeks Professor Emeritus of Economics SOAS, University of London

Most recent book: The Economics of the 1%: How mainstream economics serves the rich, obscures reality and distorts policy (Anthem, January 2014) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.45.52 (talk) 11:40, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Professor Weeks, and thanks for asking. As you have realised, you have a conflict of interest, and so are strongly discouraged from editing the article. As indicated on the page Best practices for editors with close associations, your best course is to make suggestions on the talk page (in this case, Talk:John Weeks (economist)), so that uninvolved editors can decide what to add. All information should be referenced to reliable published sources; for non-controversial factual information the source can be connected with you (eg the SOAS web page) but for anything evaluative or potentially controversial it should be referenced to an independent source. In the case of a book, its existence is easy to substantiate; but an article about a person should not necessarily mention every publication, and it would be desirable to reference an independent source such as a review that establishes that the book is notable enough to appear in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 11:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no problem with you identifying source material that is independent of yourself. However, your recent book is not independent of John Weeks. The SOAS staff listing source and Weeks personal home page cited as references in the John Weeks article - the only two references listed in that article - are not independent of John Weeks. The columns you have written and the things you said in interviews are not independent of John Weeks. Unfortunately, your name is so common that it is difficult to find any reliable source newspaper, books, or magazine articles about your life. You can help put by identifying two reliable sources that discuss you life in detail and that are independent of John Weeks. You can post that source material in this thread. I suggest avoid listing websites and press releases as source material. You also can create an 'In the News' section on your personal home page that lists newspaper, book, and magazine media coverage of your life events (including reviews of your books and other written material). Wikipedia editors then can go through that source list and expand the John Weeks biography. It would help Wikipedia editors if you use APA style, Harvard style , or Chicago style with URL links to the source material. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which template to use for tagging external link

When should I use {{Login required}} and when {{Registration required}} when tagging an external link? More specifically, which of the two should I use for tagging the fourth link at Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search#External links? -- Toshio Yamaguchi 13:49, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GIMPS Forum is an official discussion forum of GIMPS, but if it requires a login and the page shown by clicking on the URL does show any information about GIMPS that would be helpful to the Wikipedia or is directly relevant to the GIMPS Wikipedia article. WP:LINKSTOAVOID (1) site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article, (6) Sites that require registration to view the relevant content, (10) chat or discussion forums, (12) Open wikis (for the Mersenne Wiki EL), 13. Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject, such as a discussion forum website on an article about the general GIMPS subject. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And regarding the GIMPS Wikipedia article, there are hundreds of reliable sources that are independent of the subject from which the article can be written. Yet, the article is almost entirely sourced to the Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search published material, which is not independent of the subject of the article. The article should be stubbed and allowed to expand with independent source material. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:57, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help with copyright issue please!

I've found a picture from a different language Wikipedia article that I want to use on the English Wikipedia, the original is here, I have looked around on the internet for this and can only seem to find it on journals and other sort of sites with no information on the copyright such as [1] it comes from allegedly the Richard Rein - Rasse und Kultur unserer Urväter. Ein methodisch-schultechnisches Hilfsbuch für Unterricht und Vorträge in der Vorgeschichte. 1936. "Race and culture of our ancestors. Methodological manual for school classes and lectures on ancient history." but I can't seem to find this on any official websites. The article in the Russian Wikipedia states that its past its copyright date

"This work is in the public domain because the term of the exclusive rights to it has expired. It was first made public until January 1, 1943 , and its author (if known) died before that date."

So would this be okay to just save the image and upload it as copyright expired?--Windows66 (talk) 14:34, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Windows66, the copyright experts hang out at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions--S Philbrick (Talk) 14:48, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ask away over there now, thanks!--Windows66 (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

my wikikedia page

Hello, I am writing you because a wikipedia luxembourg has been created. And as a luxembourgish director, my information are visible. I dont want that some information about me been so easily found. Even if they are somehwere in internet. I asked the moderator about my request and they are not doing anything. If my request is not done, i want that they remove me totally from wikipedia, what they ndont do either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyrus neshvad (talk • contribs) 14:56, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of Wikipedias#List does not show a link for Luxembourgish Wikipedia. This appears to be Luxembourgish Wikipedia. There is a Diskussioun:Cyrus Neshvad here that began 7. Aug. 2013. It looks like the Diskussioun:Cyrus Neshvad page was blanked 13. Aug. 2013‎ by User:Zinneke.[2] The article page, Cyrus Neshvad, is still be there. English Wikipedia's information on Dealing with articles about yourself is at WP:BIOSELF. English Wikipedia information where the subject of an article has requested deletion of the article is at WP:BLPDEL. You maybe able to use that information back at Luxembourgish Wikipedia to support your request that the Cyrus Neshvad article on Luxembourgish Wikipedia be deleted. English Wikipedia does not normally delete or blank discussion talk pages. We do have Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing and Wikipedia:Oversight that can result in the removal of particular posts, including talk page posts. Luxembourgish Wikipedia may have something equivalent to these. English Wikipedia does not have a Cyrus Neshvad page, so there is not much we can do here. You might be able to find help from users listed in Category:Luxembourg Wikipedians or Category:Wikipedians in Luxembourg.-- Jreferee (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

privacy concerns are probably best handled through the WP:OTRS channels. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been asked to comment on this by Jreferee. I'm afraid that, not writing Luxembourgish, I cannot contribute to the deletion discussion directly, but I will say that I'm not sure what Mr. Neshvad finds bad about his article (which incidentally is here). It seems to be pretty anemic and carries only very basic information, with no "controversy" or remotely libelous or invasive content. In fact, 50% of the article is content found on Mr. Neshvad's own website, and the rest comes from the Lux government's website. I know different Wikis have different notability criteria, but to be honest, I think his best option might be to argue that he is non-notable. There are certainly no WP:RS on him that I can discover. Brigade Piron (talk) 16:46, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help on Creating A New Page (Unique-ish situation)

Hello, I'm a new user to Wikipedia seeking to create a new page. However, I'd like to state my situation a bit more specifically so I could possibly have a bit more pinpointed help. I currently taking a Literature class in my high school that is requiring it's students to do a project on something that would change the world. I decided that my world-changing project would revolve around adding to the largest collection of information on the Internet, this site. If it wouldn't be any trouble, I would like some suggestions on tips on what I could create a new page on as well as some of the materials (like books) I should keep in mind and use when creating this new page. Thanks, gauhceGoose — Preceding unsigned comment added by GaucheGoose (talk • contribs) 16:14, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More potential subjects that you can shake a stick at : Wikipedia:Requested articles.

Reading this before you start will probably be very helpful: Wikipedia:Your first article.

Good luck!-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:22, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What are the best hours to edit/view Wikipedia?

There have been some complaints recently (example} about busy servers and technical problems. Just wondering if there are less busy hours in the day to access Wikipedia. Thanks in advance, XOttawahitech (talk) 17:39, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can only find some extremely old (2002) data at WP:Traffic which suggests that the quietest time then was 03.00 - 07.00 UTC Wikipedia:Statistics may be able to suggest a more up to date page, but so far I haven't been able to find one. Arjayay (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

content authenticity and lack of monitoring

please remind the general public more often that what isthe mode of operation of wikipedia. Fact is that amount of disinformation is growing so fast and especially people behind many usernames are in fact professional promotion agencies and thus provide paid-for dis-information. Currently many so-called trend topics, ufos, genetics, etc. are soon containing more paid pages than actual, referenced information.Say, you have interest on origin of human. 1st thing you get is fiction after fiction stating notes and quotes from tv-series!!! Pleade, just delete or categorize pages like those under class: fiction. To begin with, separate fact and fiction! Only thing preventing me from donating money for wikipedia is the fact that you do not provide what you say you do. Eg. ancient aliens as tv-series is reauired to have statement about program being fictious entertainment, but wikipedia claims it as truth or at least as equivivalent. Now, you have a decision to make, cut out shit or sell shit. What is it goung to be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.131.237.31 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 23 November 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

You could help us by giving examples of articles with misinformation in them, or fiction presented as fact, so that we can deal with them. Maproom (talk) 18:50, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Hi. I am a donor to Wikipedia as I find it so useful. However I find editing so complex I have been unable to add an article. The "Teahouse" was equally bewildering and when I tried to type a question on "livechat" my typing did not connect Is there a user friendly guide to editing Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidg58 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The tutorial at WP:TUTORIAL should help you get started. RudolfRed (talk) 20:54, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Selecting beta and visual editor might help as well. XFEM Skier (talk) 07:35, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]